MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Cross-sectional analysis of initially curved composite beams with rectangular and circular sections using an asymptotic meshless method

2024· article· en· W4394893417 on OpenAlexafffund
Saeid Khadem Moshir, Suong V. Hoa, Farjad Shadmehri

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Solids and Structures · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicComposite Structure Analysis and Optimization
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsFinite element methodCartesian coordinate systemBeam (structure)Image warpingIsotropyMathematical analysisMathematicsCylindrical coordinate systemGeometryStructural engineeringPhysicsEngineeringComputer scienceOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An analytical meshless cross-sectional dimensional reduction method is developed to perform structural analysis of initially curved composite beams. By introducing the Pascal polynomials in the Cartesian coordinates system for beams with rectangular cross-sections and in the polar coordinates system for the beams with circular cross-sections to the warping field, a three-dimensional beam problem can be split into a two-dimensional cross-sectional analysis and a one-dimensional along the reference line of the beam. The obtained cross-sectional stiffness matrix based on higher-order of the strain energy can be incorporated into a one-dimensional finite element solution for initially curved composite beams, for the purpose of strain and stress analysis. Finally, the three-dimensional strain through the thickness of the beam can be achieved by the recovery analysis. The present method takes advantage of Pascal polynomials so that the solution procedure will be more simplified and computationally more efficient compared to three-dimensional finite element (3D FE) method. The proposed method for different isotropic and anisotropic beams is examined and compared with the literature, 3D FE, and Variational Asymptotic Beam Sectional (VABS) package which is a finite element based cross-sectional analysis tool for composite beams.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.295 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Solids and StructuresSame topicComposite Structure Analysis and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207